Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lmfao, there is a name for a person who willingly gets raped by the system and it's called "Sucker". Alimony is not as rare as you may think. I know people personally who are paying it right now. If a woman becomes a stay at home mom, then she needs to understand what she is getting herself into and accept the negatives. If an accountant quits his job and starts working at mcdonalds, then he can't expect the same salary or work conditions. I think that when two people separate, they should be responsible for themselves. If that means that a former stay at home mom has to work 60 hours a week and move into Section 8 housing or a homeless shelter, then so be it. You prove my point exactly. The laws are unfair and biased. It is ridiculous to have child support go beyond the basic cost of living. Raised in the fashion they would be raised if they lived with you? No wonder there are so many guys out there saying screw it.
The accountant analogy doesn't work. Yes, if I quit my job and go to work at Mickey D's, I'd have to expect my lifestyle to drastically change. But it's degrading to marriage to compare it to a job a woman gets, and quits at her own peril.
Alimony started back when middle-class (and up) women largely couldn't work outside the home, and daycare was almost nonexistent (unless the family could afford a nanny). Women could work OR get married; there was little room for both (apart from among the poorer classes, where alimony wasn't a real issue anyway, there being no money). Divorce was also more difficult to get.
So a woman would quit her job, get married, stay home, and raise the kids. Twenty years later, husband trades her in for a younger model. Are you suggesting that the divorced wife let him out of the legally-binding marriage contract without compensation? She'd have to be the world's biggest idiot. It's a legal contract. You seem to expect the wife to know what she's getting into when she gets a divorce, but don't expect the same forethought from the husband.
Yes, there are still cases today where a spouse is ordered to pay alimony, though this is largely among the aging population (the last generation to have a majority of couples where the wife doesn't work). Among those forty and under, alimony is extremely rare. This is because alimony "makes up the difference" in standards of living. That is, if each spouse earns $100K, there's no logic in one paying the other anything. But if one earns $100K and the other earns $10K at a part-time job, alimony might be awarded (but age and length of marriage will factor in; a 60-year-old isn't expected to improve her lot so may draw alimony for life, whereas a 30-year-old may be awarded alimony only for five years, to give her time to finish a degree and get on her feet).
And alimony goes both ways. I have a friend who earns $200K a year. Her husband earned only $50K at his job, so he stayed home with the kids. Fifteen years later, a divorce, and she was ordered to pay him alimony until the kids are 18 (and she pays child support, too, because he was always the primary caretaker). Was she angry? Yes. Was it fair? Yes.
If you don't want to pay alimony, sign a prenuptial agreement, or marry someone who earns the same amount or more than you. Or, as you suggest, don't get married at all.
But don't complain that a commonly known, well-vetted, long-established law took you by surprise and did you wrong. You signed the contract.
Yes, all the other things you just mentioned are indeed significant factors. The "family court system" is not significant.
Yes, yes there is. It sounds like it's written by a very selfish person with a very superficial understanding of family economics.
False analogy.
How do you know the family court system is not significant? If guys are screwed regularly and get sodomized with attorney fees, then that will be a pretty strong deterrent to getting married. Seeing what some of my relatives have gone through with the family court system has certainly made me come out against marriage.
If standing up for what you worked for is selfish, then so be it. I understand the economics of a family WHILE THE FAMILY EXISTS. But when a family splits up due to divorce, that family system no longer exists. That is the reason why I said that people should be responsible for themselves upon termination of the family structure.
Just because you disagree with my position doesn't make it a false analogy. The market value of being a housekeeper and nanny is much MUCH lower than that of a specialized white collar position that the woman could be pursuing instead of being a stay at home mom.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizardofmoz
The accountant analogy doesn't work. Yes, if I quit my job and go to work at Mickey D's, I'd have to expect my lifestyle to drastically change. But it's degrading to marriage to compare it to a job a woman gets, and quits at her own peril.
Alimony started back when middle-class (and up) women largely couldn't work outside the home, and daycare was almost nonexistent (unless the family could afford a nanny). Women could work OR get married; there was little room for both (apart from among the poorer classes, where alimony wasn't a real issue anyway, there being no money). Divorce was also more difficult to get.
So a woman would quit her job, get married, stay home, and raise the kids. Twenty years later, husband trades her in for a younger model. Are you suggesting that the divorced wife let him out of the legally-binding marriage contract without compensation? She'd have to be the world's biggest idiot. It's a legal contract. You seem to expect the wife to know what she's getting into when she gets a divorce, but don't expect the same forethought from the husband.
Yes, there are still cases today where a spouse is ordered to pay alimony, though this is largely among the aging population (the last generation to have a majority of couples where the wife doesn't work). Among those forty and under, alimony is extremely rare. This is because alimony "makes up the difference" in standards of living. That is, if each spouse earns $100K, there's no logic in one paying the other anything. But if one earns $100K and the other earns $10K at a part-time job, alimony might be awarded (but age and length of marriage will factor in; a 60-year-old isn't expected to improve her lot so may draw alimony for life, whereas a 30-year-old may be awarded alimony only for five years, to give her time to finish a degree and get on her feet).
And alimony goes both ways. I have a friend who earns $200K a year. Her husband earned only $50K at his job, so he stayed home with the kids. Fifteen years later, a divorce, and she was ordered to pay him alimony until the kids are 18 (and she pays child support, too, because he was always the primary caretaker). Was she angry? Yes. Was it fair? Yes.
If you don't want to pay alimony, sign a prenuptial agreement, or marry someone who earns the same amount or more than you. Or, as you suggest, don't get married at all.
But don't complain that a commonly known, well-vetted, long-established law took you by surprise and did you wrong. You signed the contract.
Like, I said to the guy before you, just because you disagree with the accounting analogy does not mean it does not work. I personally find it degrading that a man should have to support a woman he no longer has a connection to. If the government is so concerned about these divorced women then the government ought to have more generous programs and welfare available for them.
Yes, I am suggesting that the woman should not get anything. She should be responsible for herself. Men do not have a sacred obligation to pay women vaginal royalties when they get divorced. I do expect the guy to know what he's getting himself into, which is why I am a firm opponent of marriage until there is a major overhaul and de-Marxification of the family court system. I am not surprised one bit that Bush was trying to get low income women married. He tried to promote marriage because the hypothetical husbands to these low income women would be legally obligated to pay their wives support in a divorce (thus lowering the government's welfare tab). I could care less if alimony goes both ways. I do not think it is fair either way. I think whatever you earn is what you keep and if you don't earn enough to stay afloat then the dept of public welfare is the place for you. Prenuptial agreements are often overturned by judges, so having one would probably do you squat. Just because the person you marry makes the same as you at the time of marriage does not mean that the person will keep making that amount for the entire marriage. I am not complaining the law took me by surprise, since I have never been married and have no desire to be married. But I still have the right to complain about anti-male laws in the US.
I have said over and over on this forum that the Family Court System is a scam, blame feminism and women's liberation for that crap. It was designed to breakup the traditional family in favor of paying off Divorce Attorneys, Judges and women. Nobody gives a rat's tail about the children.
I think fleeing the country is worth it when there's serious criminal issues against you where you would land in prison for a very long time if not forever. I would look to flee then because think about it, if you are going to prison "for life" what else do you have to lose lol?
- Student Loan debt can be forgiven using the IBR/PAYE/PSF payment reduction and forgiveness programs out here today. If you have $200,000 in student loans and don't believe you will ever pay it off, say screw it and go work for a Non Profit 501(c)3 and get it forgiven in 10 years.
- Credit Card Debt and other Installment Debt can be taken off in Bankruptcy. Speaking of Bankruptcy, you could POSSIBLY get the Student Loans taken off as well: https://studentaid.ed.gov/repay-loan...n#discharge-in
The quality of life in other places might not be as good as it is in the United States, despite ALL of the crap that goes on in this country I would still (as of 2014/2015) rather be HERE than in some foreign country somewhere that might not have all of the resources and military power/protection needed to survive long term.
But you have some things you can do:
- Only borrow what you can afford. Keep the credit cards open and pay them off before the grace period, you will get the rewards on that spending but not have to pay the interest, that's free money as the credit card cashback is not taxed.
- DO NOT get married and DO NOT create kids with an American woman. Look at creating kids with a surrogate mother if possible. This opts you out of all of the CRAP women and their family puts us through.
- Or if you want the kids so bad with an American woman, choose an American woman that has a degree and a career and DOES NOT want to live off of you. Basically she's okay with setting up an agreement outside of the Courts where you have the child half of the time, she has them half of the time, you guys pay 50/50 expenses, etc. etc. She's not trying to STOP her career to be a stay at home woman/wife, but she wanted to have children with someone that would help her pay and take care of them half of the time.
- Oh yeah, did I say DON'T GET MARRIED yet? This is very important, men you need to STOP getting married. This is how you end up financially destroyed. You have a 20% chance or less of marrying a woman and staying married to her until one of you dies off with a happily ever after situation throughout the marriage. I broke all this down in the other thread. You have a 60% chance of divorce for 1st-3rd marriages and if you stay together, only about HALF of the marriages that stay together are peaceful, loving, growing, etc. That's not a gamble I would take.
Too many women get on this forum bragging about being stay at home wives, they are setting their poor husbands up to financially destroy him in 5-10 years with half the assets, ownership of the house, the cars, the kids, and oh yeah......lifetime alimony!
I don't even know why I'm bothering responding, considering what a toxic personality you seem to have, but nevertheless...
Quote:
Originally Posted by polski4u
How do you know the family court system is not significant? If guys are screwed regularly and get sodomized with attorney fees, then that will be a pretty strong deterrent to getting married. Seeing what some of my relatives have gone through with the family court system has certainly made me come out against marriage.
Your anecdotal evidence aside, no literature I have ever read has highlighted the family court system as a significant cause, certainly not alongside serious factors like "decline in organized religion, bad economy, prolonged educational requirements and cultural shifts away from traditional values," which indeed have been cited. Just because it's your personal hobby horse at the moment does not mean it shares the same degree of relevance to the average person.
Quote:
If standing up for what you worked for is selfish, then so be it. I understand the economics of a family WHILE THE FAMILY EXISTS. But when a family splits up due to divorce, that family system no longer exists. That is the reason why I said that people should be responsible for themselves upon termination of the family structure.
You either don't understand how opportunity cost works, or the situation is someone married a trophy wife and should have known it going in, in which case I still don't have much sympathy. Or maybe you do understand, but then proceed to display quite some hypocrisy by representing a non-working woman's contribution to the family as worthless while decrying the decline of traditional values.
Quote:
Just because you disagree with my position doesn't make it a false analogy. The market value of being a housekeeper and nanny is much MUCH lower than that of a specialized white collar position that the woman could be pursuing instead of being a stay at home mom.
I don't care what kind of debt/lawsuits we are talking about: student loans, unpaid taxes, child support, spousal support, divorce settlements, civil court orders, etc. Imagine any type of BIG $ debt and this thread applies.
Why the hell do people seriously bother with any of that garbage? If people have big dollar debts, they would not have to pay/deal with that stuff if they just left the country. The situation with student loans is a ripoff and scandal, as many people have already said in the past. The family court system is even worse and treats men like slaves.
I am in my mid 20s, hence I never went through the family court system. I have some student loans and I am seriously thinking about going back to school, running up the tab, and then leaving the country. I am a dual citizen in an EU country (where most of my family lives anyway) so that is not much of a stretch if we are talking frankly. If things went horribly wrong with a future girlfriend/wife and she wanted to sue me in family court, I would simply leave the country and live off the radar for the rest of my life. That sure beats getting raped in family court by some Marxist judge.
That being said, why don't more people leave the US to avoid enormous debts? It's a strategy that works if executed well. For some people, it could save money in the long run if their income is very low and the debt is very high. I realize that the majority of people are too sheepish and scared to do something like this, but American society also has plenty of bold and daring people as well.
Besides it being a criminal act, it isn't so easy to get work permits/visas to live in other countries.
There's been no explosion of admin spending at my university, though. There's been no growth of admin positions or salaries. On the contrary, after cutting back staff positions several times, they went through a phase of eliminating entire departments. They went about it really stupidly, too, and almost eliminated some top-ranking departments nation-wide, but those depts. fought back. And at UC Berkeley it was obvious that after California's Proposition 13 passed, limiting property taxes, the universities started hemorrhaging faculty positions in favor of letting grad students teach. Since then they've had to cut back on admin staff, groundskeepers, anything they could cut. A film was made about it and ran on PBS last year.
I attended California University long after Prop 13 passed over 35 years ago in 1978. I don't know how it was before because it was before my time.
I worked my way through engineering school and had almost no debt... did use credit card when things were tight and managed to pay off everything within one year of graduation.
Some of my friends were full scholarship... either academic or athletic and they did have a lot more time for campus life...
The short of it is for most debt... America is still the land of Bankruptcy and the stigma soon fades for most.
because people are use to the US sytem. Besides they are not wanted or allow any where worth really living to most. But many others would be glad they moved to reduce the dependent numbers.
I'm a mother of triplets. My ex-husband abused the children, and so I was awarded sole custody. The ex promptly sold all of his property, quit his job, and withdrew his retirement early then fled to the Philippines--all to avoid paying child support. He had the means to pay, he just didn't want to. My children and I struggle on my income, but I do not qualify for welfare assistance.
When I read your blog, I couldn't help but be disgusted! There are children all over the US living in poverty because of selfish, deadbeat dads and you seem to think its no big deal! SHAME ON YOU!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
